I agree that this is a very interesting paper. Although based on your title, I almost expected you to argue that Americans aren't frightened by data-mining driven determinations about their future because they come from a religious tradition of predetermination.

I think you need to directly address the issue of Free Will that Liz, Ted, and Andrei mention. When you're faced with the hypothetical you set out in the first paragraph, i.e. a world in which data mining results in hyper-accurate modeling of behavior, there are two possible outcomes. If there is free will, such modeling will never be accurate enough to justify the intrusions into our personal lives. If, on the other hand, such modeling is possible, it brings into serious doubt the very idea of free will, social mobility, and the self made man. That's the fulcrum of the issue right there. All of your retorts hinge on one assumption - that hyper-accurate modeling is not possible.

Otherwise you're left fighting for a principle that has no empirical backing. There's no point in arguing for exceptions to the rule when the rulemaker will be able to say with near perfect accuracy that no exceptional cases exist.

-- RazaPanjwani - 10 Aug 2009